We love war. Not only does it produce tremendous suffering and death, it produces tremendous profits for the 'military industrial complex' and we spend tremendous mental energy searching for some form of validation to justify our desire to go to war.

Recently, we have been 'on a roll' in the Middle East. In Afghanistan our excuse was our pursuit of Osama bin Laden although history now demonstrates clearly that it was not our real purpose... only an excuse. We rolled right on into Iraq where our excuse was 'weapons of mass destruction' although history now demonstrates clearly that it was not our real purpose... only an excuse.

We have maintained our momentum in the region... Yemen, Somalia, Libya... Syria.

We feel a sense of desperate urgency to attack Iran and we continually attempt to concoct some form of excuse for that attack.

In the mean-time, we busy ourselves by inventing 'reasons' for attacking Syria who we have been publicly wanting to attack for many years...

And now, finally a chemical attack takes place in Syria and under the pretense of a humanitarian effort, saving the Syrian population (tongue in cheek) we have an excuse to attack, and here we go.

But, based on our history, based on our premeditation, based on our previously uncovered methods there is basis for a serious question... "who really attacked using chemical weapons in Syria?"

The official story from the United States has 'doubt' written all over it... and that's the truth !!!

"Early in the morning of August 21, 2013, Sarin gas killed hundreds of men, women, and children. Victims suffered horrible deaths, going into spasms and gasping for air. The videos, produced by the rebels, blamed the Syrian army."​The Obama administration strongly condemned the Assad regime and over the next few weeks prepared to bomb Syria in retaliation. The rebels hoped the American bombing raids would destroy Assad’s air force and lead to an opposition victory.

The Assad regime argued that the rebels, not the government, had fired the chemical weapons in order to provoke a US assault on Damascus. UN weapons inspectors eventually issued two reports on the use of chemical weapons. Investigative reporters cast doubts on some of the Obama administration’s claims. The controversy deepened over time.

The U.N. thoroughly investigated the first 2013 attack. The U.N Commission of Inquiry’s Carla Del Ponte ultimately said the evidence indicated the attack was carried out by the Syrian rebels — not the Syrian government. Despite this, support for the Syrian rebels from the U.S. and its allies only increased, raising serious questions about Obama’s sincerity when condemning chemical attacks.

Pulitzer-Prize winning journalist Seymour Hersh found the second major attack was committed in a similar manner. Hersh found that the U.S. quite deliberately attempted to frame the evidence to justify a strike on Assad without even considering al-Nusra, a terror group with access to nerve agents that should have been a prime suspect.

That was then​And, this is now

The alleged chemical attack, which supposedly killed 58 people in Syria, appears to have been a false flag “media campaign” planned well in advance to oust President Assad.

So far, 58 people have been reported dead as a result of the supposed attack, in the town of Khan Sheikhun, on Tuesday morning.

Just hours after the incident occurred, Western media outlets and NATO governments were quick to condemn the Syrian government, claiming that the “Assad regime bears responsibility for ‘awful’ Syria ‘chemical’ attack.”

And that should be a huge question mark, since no investigation whatsoever was conducted before putting the blame on the Syrian government.

In fact, with 11 NATO countries conducting military operations in Syria for years now (i.e. bombing the country and its civilian population to pieces), Assad's regime would have to be really stupid to shoot itself in the foot like that.

As always, if you want to find out who the real culprit is, then all you have to ask yourself "cui bono" — "who benefits"? Surely not Assad.

As expected, the details about the attacks — as told by the White Helmets — appears to be full of holes.

As can be seen in the pictures, the Al-Qaeda-affiliated White Helmets are handling the injured people without wearing proper safety gear.

Within seconds of exposure to sarin, the gas aggressively targets the muscles and nervous system. There is an almost immediate release of the bowels and the bladder, and vomiting is induced. [Not consistent to what we can see from the videos and pictures].

When sarin is used in a highly populated area, it usually leads to the deaths of thousands of people. [Only 58 have been reported dead].

So why are the White Helmets handling the alleged victims without any concern for their own safety?